Smith's Sunday Mailbag
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:24 pm
read more here
Here's an excerpt:
Here's an excerpt:
Q: This is not your typical "get Sam Dalembert" demand to BC... consider it an honest question. Why don't you think he would be a good fit here? He averages a double-double and protects the basket (2.5 blocks). And at 73% from the line he is not a Ben Wallace liability at the end of games. Is it because of his salary? ($10 mill IS quite a bit). Or is it a lack of potential?
Ed C, Toronto
A: Money has almost everything to do with it, he
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:38 pm
I agree with Doug and I feel the same way about players like Rudy gay who many raptor fans seem to think would be instant success in Toronto and drool over his stats while trashing Bargnani every chance they get, Rudy Gay is -88 over his last six games. Thes types of players never seem to be on winning toeams or make teammates better or are around when it matters most.
Re: Smith's Sunday Mailbag
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:44 pm
supersub15 wrote:read more here
Here's an excerpt:Q: This is not your typical "get Sam Dalembert" demand to BC... consider it an honest question. Why don't you think he would be a good fit here? He averages a double-double and protects the basket (2.5 blocks). And at 73% from the line he is not a Ben Wallace liability at the end of games. Is it because of his salary? ($10 mill IS quite a bit). Or is it a lack of potential?
Ed C, Toronto
A: Money has almost everything to do with it, he
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:54 pmbballin wrote:I agree with Doug and I feel the same way about players like Rudy gay who many raptor fans seem to think would be instant success in Toronto and drool over his stats while trashing Bargnani every chance they get, Rudy Gay is -88 over his last six games. Thes types of players never seem to be on winning toeams or make teammates better or are around when it matters most.
Gay is better, and would be a better fit on this team than Bargnani. Of course fans will bring his name up and trash Bargnani. Unless Bargs shows some drastic improvement over the next 1.5 years, it will continue to happen. Until then we all just have to deal with it.
Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:57 pmwhat's this about a black third jersey? is that confirmed?
Edit: NM, just saw Doug's last post. I hope they keep "Toronto" on the front.
A new look coming
A year or so, a wise old sage suggested these guys should have a third jersey, that should be black
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:00 ammangos wrote:what's this about a black third jersey? is that confirmed?
Edit: NM, just saw Doug's last post. I hope they keep "Toronto" on the front.A new look coming
A year or so, a wise old sage suggested these guys should have a third jersey, that should be black
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:12 amBasketball_Jones wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Gay is better, and would be a better fit on this team than Bargnani. Of course fans will bring his name up and trash Bargnani. Unless Bargs shows some drastic improvement over the next 1.5 years, it will continue to happen. Until then we all just have to deal with it.
I disagree Gay is merely an average player on a bad team who has failed to make the Grizzlies better while having a decent starting five on paper. If you put bargnani on a losing team he to would be putting up points being given the green light to develop at all costs. We also would of never aquired Moon if we had drafted Gay who in my opinion is a better defender, a better rebounder, a better blocker, better at steals and is pretty much equal in my mind at scoring the ball (inconsistent J). Gay has done nothing in this league but lose, his rookie season was not as good as bargnani's, and this year while he is scoring more his defense and other aspects of his game has regressed. As I said above over his last six games he is an embarrassing -88 yet some fans continue to droll on him, if bargnani ever had -88 over a six game stretch even I would be asking for his head.
Guys like these are a dime a dozen, they make a big block or a big dunk and on the very next play they make a dumb turn over, make a lazy half effort pass, caught out of position, let there man blow by them, fail to make teammates better and never are there when the game is on the line not only to keep their team in it but lift them to victory.
Its amazing to me how a fan watches Dalembert and he makes say five freakish blocks during a game and afterwards they say "wow what a stud, he would be great here". Mean while they totally ignore the other 50 posessions where he was abused and scored on at will while making poor decisions on the other end as well which often result in his teams loss.
Neither of these guys are a difference maker in the outcome of games and there is many more like them in the NBA.
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:15 ambballin wrote:I agree with Doug and I feel the same way about players like Rudy gay who many raptor fans seem to think would be instant success in Toronto and drool over his stats while trashing Bargnani every chance they get, Rudy Gay is -88 over his last six games. Thes types of players never seem to be on winning toeams or make teammates better or are around when it matters most.
Of course, nobody felt this way about Bosh while he was putting up great numbers when we were terrible.
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:24 amDoug's right on this one. Just because a player is doing good on a bad team doesn't mean he will do good on a decent or good team. A perfect example of this is Mike James when he was with the Raptors.
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:24 amJoker wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Of course, nobody felt this way about Bosh while he was putting up great numbers when we were terrible.
Bosh never played with anyone on the level of Gasol or Mike Miller though
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:26 amHow would Dalembert become worse by playing for us? Would he block fewer shots because we're a better team than Philly? what's the logic behind that?
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:26 amalivinglegend wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Bosh never played with anyone on the level of Gasol or Mike Miller though
Vince Carter? Jalen Rose?
Bosh never played in the Western Conference either.
Btw, you don't have to be as good as Bosh to make an impact on this team.
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:28 amelephunk wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Vince Carter? Jalen Rose? AD?
Bosh never played in the Western Conference either.
He played with AD for what 20 games, a full effort VC for 70? maybe? Jalen Rose for a season (which the team WAS actually going to make the playoffs until Jalen broke his hand causing the team to miss it again)
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:29 ambballin wrote:Its amazing to me how a fan watches Dalembert and he makes say five freakish blocks during a game and afterwards they say "wow what a stud, he would be great here". Mean while they totally ignore the other 50 posessions where he was abused and scored on at will while making poor decisions on the other end as well which often result in his teams loss.
Neither of these guys are a difference maker in the outcome of games and there is many more like them in the NBA.
If you wanna talk about +/-, Dalembert leads the Sixers in +/-
http://www.nba.com/statistics/lenovo/le ... team=76ers
He certainly has some issues, but I overall see him as a very good fit for this team. If he can be brought in for cheap, I'd do it in a second. He is on a long and not great contract - the Sixers dumped Korver because of his contract, maybe over the summer we can do something like Rasho (large, expiring contract) + Hump (cheap, decent big) for Dalembert, I'd do it in a second. If we had to throw in a 1st, I'd probably still do it, but I'd have to think about it. A deal like that combined with a young wing player for Bargs + maybe AP's expiring makes us a good team now, with the potential to be true contenders.
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:32 am[quote="bballin"][/quote]
So what exactly are you disagreeing about? You don't think Rudy Gay is better than Bargnani? Wow. Let's just look at one of your points: Rudy Gay is given the green light to develop on a crappy team. Valid point, but how does that make him less of a player than Bargnani? You are basically saying Bargs would put up similar numbers in that type of environment, but he isn't given that opportunity. So does this make him equal to Rudy Gay or better? Because logic dictates that Bargnani doesn't have those opportunities, so he isn't as good as Rudy Gay.
As far as Gay not elevating his team, well Memphis kind of sucks in terms of overall talent. One guy can't do it all, despite one you claim to be a decent starting five. Put Bargnani on that team and they wouldn't be any better either, perhaps even worse. As far as a -88, I will assume that refers to efficiency. Rather than looking at a 6 game stretch, why not logically look at his overall seasonal +17, higher than Jamario Moons(12) and Bargnani's (6). As far as Jamario being equal to Rudy Gay offensively, you are just reaching for straws here and I won't even go further with this ridiculous point.
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:40 amponder276 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
If you wanna talk about +/-, Dalembert leads the Sixers in +/-
http://www.nba.com/statistics/lenovo/le ... team=76ers
He certainly has some issues, but I overall see him as a very good fit for this team. If he can be brought in for cheap, I'd do it in a second. He is on a long and not great contract - the Sixers dumped Korver because of his contract, maybe over the summer we can do something like Rasho (large, expiring contract) + Hump (cheap, decent big) for Dalembert, I'd do it in a second. If we had to throw in a 1st, I'd probably still do it, but I'd have to think about it. A deal like that combined with a young wing player for Bargs + maybe AP's expiring makes us a good team now, with the potential to be true contenders.
We are already a good team, we just finished off a 47 win season and are currently seeded 5th in the eastern conference while playing one of the hardest NBA schedules to date to go along with several injuries this season, TJ, Bargnani, Bosh, Garbo.
Its amazing how we went from laughing stock in the league, fans wearing paper bags over their heads to in one years time demanding championship. Anyways Dalembert doesnt make us a title contender now or in the future and with that contract thats a major no no. He is good for some rebounds and a couple nasty dunks a game but he is also a poor offensive player and a player that ofen can be seen having several serious mental lapese throughout a game.
A player with the potential to be the great but seems to not want it bad enough to go along with some serious iq issues and not understanding the finer points of the game. You dont pay a guy 60 million on potential, it would be a disaster in the sense that we would truly become a treadmill team incapable of making moves because of big contracts like his.
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:40 amBasketball_Jones wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
As far as Gay not elevating his team, well Memphis kind of sucks in terms of overall talent. One guy can't do it all, despite one you claim to be a decent starting five. Put Bargnani on that team and they wouldn't be any better either, perhaps even worse. As far as a -88, I will assume that refers to efficiency. Rather than looking at a 6 game stretch, why not logically look at his overall seasonal +17, higher than Jamario Moons(12) and Bargnani's (6). As far as Jamario being equal to Rudy Gay offensively, you are just reaching for straws here and I won't even go further with this ridiculous point.
Thing with Gay, and I wrote about it about a week ago, is he's kind of a black hole in offense. He takes 16 shots per game, which is more than their most effective scorers in Miller and Gasol.
Now, this surely isn't a big enough sample size, but in the 1 game Gay missed this season, Memphis was able to get Miller/Navarro/Gasol much more involved, and get the ball moving, and Memphis put up 102 points in 3 quarters.
Since Gay doesn't really contribute defensively, I do have to wonder if Memphis, who on paper should at least be competitive, would not have been actually better without him this season.
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:48 amJoker wrote:How would Dalembert become worse by playing for us? Would he block fewer shots because we're a better team than Philly? what's the logic behind that?
there isn't any logic to it
smith is such a company man now. He's starting to sound like chuck swirsky
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:51 amKurtz wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Thing with Gay, and I wrote about it about a week ago, is he's kind of a black hole in offense. He takes 16 shots per game, which is more than their most effective scorers in Miller and Gasol.
Now, this surely isn't a big enough sample size, but in the 1 game Gay missed this season, Memphis was able to get Miller/Navarro/Gasol much more involved, and get the ball moving, and Memphis put up 102 points in 3 quarters.
Since Gay doesn't really contribute defensively, I do have to wonder if Memphis, who on paper should at least be competitive, would not have been actually better without him this season.
He doesn't contribute defensively? 5.8 RPG, 1.5 SPG, 0.9 BPG.
I agree with you re:him taking a lot of shots. He takes about 1-2 shots more than required for my liking. If he were to play for our team, since we have Bosh, that wouldn't even be a problem.
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:53 amKurtz wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Thing with Gay, and I wrote about it about a week ago, is he's kind of a black hole in offense. He takes 16 shots per game, which is more than their most effective scorers in Miller and Gasol.
Now, this surely isn't a big enough sample size, but in the 1 game Gay missed this season, Memphis was able to get Miller/Navarro/Gasol much more involved, and get the ball moving, and Memphis put up 102 points in 3 quarters.
Since Gay doesn't really contribute defensively, I do have to wonder if Memphis, who on paper should at least be competitive, would not have been actually better without him this season.
It's an anomaly. Gay is pretty efficient at 46% (It was higher before his recent slump) so it's not like he's scoring simply off of volume. The Lakers started off last year 3-0 without Kobe, and the Cavs also had a pretty decent record alst year without Lebron. A few games here and there are just too small of a sample to really judge.
Also, that game where the Grizzlies went off without Gay was against the Sonics. Hardly a good team.